Great firewall of Britain

[bigmichaelful]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2013/jul/22/david-cameron-crackdown-internet-pornography

 

 

And the age of darkness begins.

[UselessBread]

This is so wrong...
 

I don't even have words for this. But it reminds me a bit of what I think happened in iceland a while back, were they banning porn over there as well?

[bradscoolio]

Filters are good for parents to stop their children accessing pornography, I'm all for filters (because they're easy to get passed). Making the option available for adults is fine too but trying to get Google to dismiss indexing pornographic websites is so idiodic, it's almost beyond fathomable, and just won't work... Not even if you payed them.

[ixi_your_face]

Welp, that's settled. I'm voting yes for independance.

 It's not that they're trying to filter porn, that's like trying to ban taking a shit because it makes a mess. It's that they actually think this can be implemented without wasting resources.

[Dodge]

Filters are good for parents to stop their children accessing pornography, I'm all for filters (because they're easy to get passed). Making the option available for adults is fine too but trying to get Google to dismiss indexing pornographic websites is so idiodic, it's almost beyond fathomable, and just won't work... Not even if you payed them.

Yes, filters are good for parents, but they should be installed locally by the parents and not by the government or your ISP.

[nathanhd123]

I think you guys are missing the point. They are not stopping all access to porn, they are just changing it so the filters are automatically on, they can still be turned off again at any point.

They are also not stopping Google from indexing all porn, just extreme porn.

[bigmichaelful]

The biggest issue I have with this is how they have passed it through. By pinning the filter part of the bill to the child pornography bill (of course no objections to that part) is the association they are making. There has been no vocal opposition to it because then it would appear you are defending child pornography.

[bradscoolio]

Yes, filters are good for parents, but they should be installed locally by the parents and not by the government or your ISP.

 

True dat. Anon will probably have something to say about this.

[nathanhd123]

The biggest issue I have with this is how they have passed it through. By pinning the filter part of the bill to the child pornography bill (of course no objections to that part) is the association they are making. There has been no vocal opposition to it because then it would appear you are defending child pornography.

To be honest, I don't really see any reason to object to it, as it says in the articles the account holder can easily switch it off if they would like, I think the new legislation will just make it easier for less tech savvy parents to be able to block the porn for their children without needing much tech knowledge.

That being said, I think we all know that these kind of filters can be bypassed easily so I am unsure of how effective they will be.

[bigmichaelful]

Gambling sites will be next, what then?

[bigmichaelful]

You can't restrict the whole population's internet access because parents can't set up a filter properly and are too computer illiterate to do something about it.The filtering has been around for years.

[JordanMac]

This isn't as bad as it seems, they're not blocking all porn just the illegal stuff (children etc)

[Torg73]

The problem is that we are starting to go down a road that could end up in a world like V for Vendetta or George Orwell's 1984, we losing more and personal control all the time as the Government take it away.

[Toby]

I really wish these old fools would stop trying to regulate something that they clearly don't comprehend. It's David Cameron, so doubtlessly this whole thing will fall flat on it's face, but still.

 

 

This isn't as bad as it seems, they're not blocking all porn just the illegal stuff (children etc)

 

No. They're making porn sites opt-in. Technically, they won't be blocking any porn because they don't understand that the internet was created specifically to nullify this kind of censorship, but you get what I mean. Also, what constitutes "extreme"? Simulated rape is arguably censor-worthy, but are we going to have the screaming hog-tied women of kink.com being censored? What about japanese porn, where the women can look rather in-distress to foreign eyes? Does "Alice-18" (made up) get shut down because it's trying to look as youthful and innocent as possible?

 

 

 

The Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP) is to draw up a blacklist of "abhorrent" internet search terms to identify and prevent paedophiles searching for illegal material.

 

Also, fuck this. I am confident that this would catch some poor sod looking up rapeseed child labour, or Nabokov's "Lolita".

 

Fuck it also because it just encourages criminal paedophiles to be more technologically literate and utilize the deep web, making them even harder to nail down.

 

 

Edit: A good point made in the /r/unitedkingdom subreddit...

 

This is the dumbest idea ever. Kids will just go to proxy sites or learn about how to use VPNs or Tor. It will only take one kid to discover it and then he'll show all his mates. Now instead of them browsing the normal Internet they may end up on the deep web which is the very worst part of the Internet, filled with child pornography and drugs. Wait to go Cameron.

Source: I'm a Father who works for one of the largest hosting companies in the world and I'm currently completing my masters in computer science specialising in information security and data forensics.

 

I was a kid on the internet back when deep web material was far more easily found, so on the off-chance this idiocy holds up, they'll just be exposing children to the same shit I was. They'll literally be moving things back by over 10 years.

[Dave :)]

I really wish these old fools would stop trying to regulate something that they clearly don't comprehend. It's David Cameron, so doubtlessly this whole thing will fall flat on it's face, but still.

 

 

 

No. They're making porn sites opt-in. Technically, they won't be blocking any porn because they don't understand that the internet was created specifically to nullify this kind of censorship, but you get what I mean. Also, what constitutes "extreme"? Simulated rape is arguably censor-worthy, but are we going to have the screaming hog-tied women of kink.com being censored? What about japanese porn, where the women can look rather in-distress to foreign eyes? Does "Alice-18" (made up) get shut down because it's trying to look as youthful and innocent as possible?

 

 

 

 

Also, fuck this. I am confident that this would catch some poor sod looking up rapeseed child labour, or Nabokov's "Lolita".

 

Fuck it also because it just encourages criminal paedophiles to be more technologically literate and utilize the deep web, making them even harder to nail down.

 

 

I was a kid on the internet back when deep web material was far more easily found, so on the off-chance this idiocy holds up, they'll just be exposing children to the same shit I was. They'll literally be moving things back by over 10 years.

 

I agree with what you're saying; however, it's not like Cameron is blind. Granted, he may not be on the same "tech savvy" level as most of use, but that's the reason he has advisors. He obviously didn't make this decision based on his own views, i am willing to bet alot of money that this decision was made under the guidance of many people far more knowledgeable than any of us on here in terms of the Internet and censorship. We may not agree with it; however, there is an obvious balance to be struck and evidently they feel this is the more important side.

[FireFox]

I think it's good, since it's adult material and I'm an adult, I don't see anything wrong here, I wouldn't want my kids looking at that type of content until they were old enough.

 

This isn't a bad thing in my opinion.

[meatdeluxe]

I read this this morning, They say ISPs will have to contact the account holder and ask them if they want to turn the filter on. My question is how exactly do they go about doing that? "Dear consumer, do you want to view porn? yes or no?" 

 

The chances are the filters will be so badly implemented that it'll block anything it deems as adult content. 

 

Also, who uses search for porn? you probably know the damn URL. 

 

The issue with governments around the world is they have people who have no idea how technology works, and if they do they're using that knowledge to spy on us instead of for the greater good.

[FireFox]

I don't even have words for this. But it reminds me a bit of what I think happened in iceland a while back, were they banning porn over there as well?

 

err OK :P

[meatdeluxe]

I think it's good, since it's adult material and I'm an adult it, I don't see anything wrong here, I wouldn't want my kids looking at that type of content until they were old enough.

 

This isn't a bad thing in my opinion.

You say that but at what age did you see your first dirty magazine, online image or film. I'd say most of us were in our teens. Why does the onus fall on ISPs and search providers to filter content? Why aren't parents watching their children?

[Toby]

I think it's good, since it's adult material and I'm an adult it, I don't see anything wrong here, I wouldn't want my kids looking at that type of content until they were old enough.

 

This isn't a bad thing in my opinion.

 

Except your kids would and will look at that kind of content. This isn't going to stop them.

 

 

I agree with what you're saying; however, it's not like Cameron is blind. Granted, he may not be on the same "tech savvy" level as most of use, but that's the reason he has advisors. He obviously didn't make this decision based on his own views, i am willing to bet alot of money that this decision was made under the guidance of many people far more knowledgeable than any of us on here in terms of the Internet and censorship. We may not agree with it; however, there is an obvious balance to be struck and evidently they feel this is the more important side.

 

Are you sure he's not blind? Politically, he's doing a very good impression of stumbling around in the dark.

 

Anyway, I think you give Cameron's people too much credit. I'd imagine they're the same people responsible for making my ISP "block" the Pirate Bay, preventing me from visiting and downloading torrents on a daily basis...Which I still do, quite effortlessly, from the Pirate Bay.

[FireFox]

You say that but at what age did you see your first dirty magazine, online image or film. I'd say most of us were in our teens. Why does the onus fall on ISPs and search providers to filter content? Why aren't parents watching their children?

 

When I was 12 and I got a good kicking for it

[meatdeluxe]

When I was 12 and I got a good kicking for it

That's the wrong attitude to have though, my parent's gave me a kicking too but I came across images and words that I had no meaning to me. Them scolding me made me want to know what i'd done wrong, if they'd have explained it instead then things would have been better

[FireFox]

That's the wrong attitude to have though

 

Forgive me for asking but how is that a bloody bad attitude?, you asked me a question and I answered it, I wouldn't do that to my kids but that is what happened to me.

[Dave :)]

 

Anyway, I think you give Cameron's people too much credit. I'd imagine they're the same people responsible for making my ISP "block" the Pirate Bay, preventing me from visiting and downloading torrents on a daily basis...Which I still do, quite effortlessly, from the Pirate Bay.

 

I don't see anything wrong with that. A majority of the use of TPB was for downloading illegal torrents...illegal. If you want a just system, you want a government which complies with their own laws and regulations. If it's illegal, then it should be removed. Just because some people want the freedom of being able to download copyrighted music and movies doesn't mean they should be able to. You make it out as if shutting down TPB was the wrong decision? I know there are work arounds, but it's the precedent it sets saying these types of site won't be tolerated. 

[meatdeluxe]

Forgive me for asking but how is that a bloody bad attitude?, you asked me a question and I answered it, I wouldn't do that to my kids but that is what happened to me.

I didn't say it was your attitude, but it's the attitude that most people have and this ban is enforcing. Porn = bad!